3 ms·

"Web traffic that cannot be measured, and therefore monetised... [ad blockers] block all on-site analytics" I don't think that's true at all. Clients can not p

by veeti 1y ago

"Web traffic that cannot be measured, and therefore monetised... [ad blockers] block all on-site analytics" I don't think that's true at all. Clients can not prevent measurement through server side logs. Publishers have just decided to put all their eggs in one basket by deploying a bunch of trivially bypassed JavaScript adtech trackers, and now it has come back to bite them.

JohnTHaller 1y ago
Unfortunately, any sponsor, advertiser, partner, buyer, etc isn't going to trust server-side logs since they can be easily faked.
scinadier 1y ago
Hear, hear!
SkiFire13 1y ago
The quote talks about "on-site" analytics though no? How are server side logs "on-site"?
- veeti 1y ago
  Well, client-side "on-site" trackers are used because it's easy and flexible to do so using JavaScript tags (and then get blocked by privacy aware user agents). But in my experience at a publisher many years ago, most of the important client side measurements tracked (think page views, conversions) ultimately correspond to a browser request made to a server in the publisher's control, such as fetching the article's contents or finalizing a purchase. It logically follows that the same measurements could have been made by tracking events on the server, possibly without involving additional client side scripts at all. No, it wouldn't be as easy or allow tracking everything the user does down to the pixel, but that's not the adblock enlightened user's problem... It is my understanding the industry is moving towards server side "tagging" to improve performance and probably also to try and obfuscate it from ad blockers. But I haven't paid much attention to that.
  - SkiFire13 1y ago
    > most of the important client side measurements tracked (think page views, conversions) ultimately correspond to a browser request made to a server in the publisher's control, such as fetching the article's contents or finalizing a purchase. That won't tell you how many didn't see the page or converted though.
rgavuliak 1y ago
> Publishers have just decided to put all their eggs in one basket Isn't that just the ecosystem provided by the Big Tech ad platforms? Publishers at some point very much wanted to sell ads directly as the CPMs were 10x of what they are now. Then FB and Google took over as the middlemen, pushed CPMs down, added sophisticated targeting and set the precedence for how things are implemented. Sure the tech giants could team up with the publishers to take back control but they'd need to share more of their revenue in exchange which I am doubtful they'd go for. Not just because it means losing control but also it creates the hassle of having to deal with a fractured landscape of publishers of very varying technical acumen.

by veeti 1y ago

JohnTHaller 1y ago

Unfortunately, any sponsor, advertiser, partner, buyer, etc isn't going to trust server-side logs since they can be easily faked.

scinadier 1y ago

Hear, hear!

SkiFire13 1y ago

The quote talks about "on-site" analytics though no? How are server side logs "on-site"?

veeti 1y ago
Well, client-side "on-site" trackers are used because it's easy and flexible to do so using JavaScript tags (and then get blocked by privacy aware user agents). But in my experience at a publisher many years ago, most of the important client side measurements tracked (think page views, conversions) ultimately correspond to a browser request made to a server in the publisher's control, such as fetching the article's contents or finalizing a purchase. It logically follows that the same measurements could have been made by tracking events on the server, possibly without involving additional client side scripts at all. No, it wouldn't be as easy or allow tracking everything the user does down to the pixel, but that's not the adblock enlightened user's problem... It is my understanding the industry is moving towards server side "tagging" to improve performance and probably also to try and obfuscate it from ad blockers. But I haven't paid much attention to that.
- SkiFire13 1y ago
  > most of the important client side measurements tracked (think page views, conversions) ultimately correspond to a browser request made to a server in the publisher's control, such as fetching the article's contents or finalizing a purchase. That won't tell you how many didn't see the page or converted though.

rgavuliak 1y ago

> Publishers have just decided to put all their eggs in one basket Isn't that just the ecosystem provided by the Big Tech ad platforms? Publishers at some point very much wanted to sell ads directly as the CPMs were 10x of what they are now. Then FB and Google took over as the middlemen, pushed CPMs down, added sophisticated targeting and set the precedence for how things are implemented. Sure the tech giants could team up with the publishers to take back control but they'd need to share more of their revenue in exchange which I am doubtful they'd go for. Not just because it means losing control but also it creates the hassle of having to deal with a fractured landscape of publishers of very varying technical acumen.